Comparison
Humalike vs Thinking Machines.
Thinking Machines bakes interaction into the foundation model. Humalike exposes it as composable primitives above any LLM — usable today.
Them
Thinking Machines
Frontier AI lab
Mira Murati's lab, $2B-funded. TML-Interaction-Small (May 2026 research preview) — 276B-parameter MoE (12B active), 0.4s response, full-duplex audio/video/text. The interaction loop lives in the model weights.
Us
Humalike
Behavioral infrastructure
Composable behavioral APIs — turn-taking, norms, persona, memory, theory of mind, social signals — wrapped around whatever LLM you ship. Closed beta with design partners today.
The core differences.
No feature-checklist arms race. Just the dimensions that decide which one fits — with the honest call on each.
Thinking Machines
Humalike
Generally available product
Closed research preview.
Closed beta with design partners.
Generally available product
Thinking Machines
Closed research preview.
Humalike
Closed beta with design partners.
Builds foundation models
Builds foundation models
Thinking Machines
Humalike
Model-agnostic
Their own interaction model.
Bring any LLM.
Model-agnostic
Thinking Machines
Their own interaction model.
Humalike
Bring any LLM.
Composable above any LLM
Interaction is in the weights.
Pick the APIs you need.
Composable above any LLM
Thinking Machines
Interaction is in the weights.
Humalike
Pick the APIs you need.
Multi-human rooms
Designed for 1:1 with the model.
Multi-party as a first-class case.
Multi-human rooms
Thinking Machines
Designed for 1:1 with the model.
Humalike
Multi-party as a first-class case.
Persistent memory across sessions
Persistent memory across sessions
Thinking Machines
Humalike
Social signals (typing, edits, pauses)
Social signals (typing, edits, pauses)
Thinking Machines
Humalike